Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

That's pretty much exactly what my reaction was when I looked at his stats a few minutes ago, only on the complete other side of the positive/negative feeling spectrum.

If the Sox do sign Gagne, they should learn from the Dotel signing last year, make it a team option or a multi year deal. I mean, if its six mil a year, it might be not be worth the risk to sign him to two years, but I would fighting for a team option, even if that team option is like 10 or 12 million.

BTW, I believe Dotel has know said he would pitch for two teams for free and is pitching for neither one of them this year.

I think Robothal reported that the Rangers were shopping Otsuka, looking for young pitching.

The Sox don't really have young pitching to trade (Hansen?), and I don't have any idea why the Rangers would trade one of their good pitchers. But he'd be a totally great option at closer if it weren't for all the reasons that the Sox won't get him.

Boston's bullpen is always a mess, which is what explains the Drew/Gagne Disconnect. Epstein is very good at evaluating hitters. Epstein is horrible at evaluating relievers. Ergo, Epstein's bosses give him a lot more leeway in spending money on hitters than they do in spending money on relievers.

rgo, Epstein's bosses give him a lot more leeway in spending money on hitters than they do in spending money on relievers.

Which may be the exact wrong way to approach it. All though this wasn't a particularly good market for relievers, the SOx should just buy relievers and pay a premium because otherwise they get #### for production.

Epstein has gone on record saying that there are very few relievers who can repeat good performance year after year, and that those few relievers are understandably not available. He has continued that it doesn't make sense to spend a lot of money on the bullpen because most of it will be wasted money.

Two things to that:

1. Well, with THAT kind of attitude, we're pretty much doomed to failure.

What strikes me as odd is that they are leery about this small risk, but not about giving JD Drew, whose health is also in question...

With the mantra "it's all about the variance" audible in the background...

I agree w/ Darren it seems odd. In fact, it seems odder when you look at it this way: Drew is a high-variance player, and now you've committed major PT to him, and long-term at that. Granted that Wily Mo is still on the roster as a "hedge," I think you want to reserve your long-term, guaranteed, big-money deals for low-variance guys, in general, 'cause these contracts are difficult to dispose of if they go awry (see, e.g., Dreifort, Belle, etc.).

A one-year deal for a bullpen stud, OTOH, is a little different. You can pile up lots of high-variance guys for 'pen roles (while "stockpiling" position players is tougher and more expensive). The ones who are under-performing relative to expectations can be relegated to mop-up roles or, in some cases, discarded completely; the positive deltas can win you a pennant.

So, unless the Sox have an Ace up their sleeve (as Darren notes), walking away from Gagne might be the wrong move.

The difference b/w Drew being a good player when healthy and Gagne being a good player when healthy is that we know what kind of a player Drew will be when healthy. But, even assuming health in 2007, no one expects the old Gagne - people hope for a new, Trevor Hoffman-lite Gagne.